Committee approves bill to void local ADU ordinances that ignore state review

The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee advanced SB 9, a bill that would render local accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinances null and void if a local agency fails to submit the ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days of adoption or fails to respond to HCD findings within 30 days.

Senator (author) told the committee that the bill does not force jurisdictions to make conforming amendments immediately, only to acknowledge HCD’s findings and indicate an intention to act. “If you do not respond and you do not amend the law to conform to state law, then that local ordinance would be null and void, and the state provisions would take effect,” the senator said during presentation at the hearing in Room 437 at the State Capitol. The senator said the bill moves language into a more appropriate code section within the ADU statute and that it is intended to strengthen enforcement of existing state ADU law.

Max Dubler, policy manager at California YIMBY, testified in support, saying ADUs have grown substantially and that statewide standards paired with consistent permitting are key to continued growth. “These units blend into existing neighborhoods adding housing without disrupting their look and feel,” Dubler said, adding that HCD currently provides technical assistance to jurisdictions whose ordinances conflict with state standards.

Jonathan Pacheco Bell, vice president of policy and programs at the Casita Coalition, also supported SB 9, arguing local practices sometimes deviate from state ADU law and that the bill creates an accountability mechanism. “SB 9 requires a municipality to submit an ADU ordinance to HCD for review within 60 days of adoption. And if HCD finds noncompliance, the municipality must respond to those findings within 30 days,” Pacheco Bell said.

Committee members spoke in favor of the bill’s role in standardizing zoning and speeding permitting. One member moved the bill on the floor, and the committee recorded the motion to pass the measure as amended to the Assembly Committee on Local Government.

The committee’s recorded tally for the motion was 7 ayes, 0 noes and 2 abstentions. The committee kept the roll open for further entries.

SB 9’s supporters said the change would ensure equitable, consistent implementation of state ADU reforms across jurisdictions and reduce local barriers to ADU production. Opponents did not register primary witnesses in opposition during the hearing.

The bill’s supporters included California YIMBY and the Casita Coalition, which were present by testimony. The committee accepted amendments and moved the bill forward to the next committee assignment.